On Fri, 2025-02-14 at 12:38 +0100, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
> On 2/14/25 12:18 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I tried to address Ales' review comments here:
> > > > > https://github.com/dceara/ovn/commit/3655aa3
> > > > > 
> > > > > But I'm also going to reindent and do some minor style
> > > > > changes in
> > > > > the
> > > > > system tests.
> > > > > 
> > > > > In the meantime, Ales, Martin, please let me know if the
> > > > > incremental
> > > > > changes look OK to you, I can squash them in when applying
> > > > > the
> > > > > series.
> > > > 
> > > > Those changes look good to me. System test for NAT will need
> > > > slight
> > > > touchup as I mentione above, since the invalid NAT entries
> > > > won't be
> > > > advertised anymore after adding 2nd DGW port.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Hmm, I'm not sure what other things need adjustment, I did that
> > > already:
> > > 
> > > https://github.com/dceara/ovn/commit/3655aa3#diff-538df8a7fc4aa894586caf2191217e5d8a50bf245ee88faf90516a1c229cf42aR16993-R16996
> > > 
> > > And the system tests pass with that change.  Am I missing
> > > something?
> > 
> > It's probably me that's missing the point, but if we skip invalid
> > nat
> > records, wouldn't these two stop being advertised?
> > 
> > https://github.com/dceara/ovn/blob/3655aa3afce2a6b83e410830fae609788f0cd8dc/tests/system-ovn.at#L17066-L17067
> > 
> > Since those rules are now on distributed router with more than one
> > DGW
> > port and no --gateway-port? Those two were the ones that were
> > triggering the crash before we started filtering the !is_valid
> > records.
> > But you are right, tests do pass.
> >  
> > Martin.
> > 
> 
> So, you pointed to these two routes:
> blackhole 10.42.10.10 proto 84 metric 1000
> blackhole 10.42.10.11 proto 84 metric 1000
> 
> And my change did:
> 
> # Create NAT on R2
> check ovn-nbctl --gateway-port r2-join \
>     lr-nat-add R2 dnat_and_snat 10.42.10.10 192.168.1.10
> check ovn-nbctl --gateway-port r2-join \
>     lr-nat-add R2 dnat_and_snat 10.42.10.11 192.168.1.11
> 
> https://github.com/dceara/ovn/blob/3655aa3afce2a6b83e410830fae609788f0cd8dc/tests/system-ovn.at#L16992C1-L16996C57
> 
> The two NATs now have gateway port configured.  Without it the NAT
> entries are invalid indeed.
> 

Oh of course, you are correct. I think I'm really losing my focus after
this week, sorry. Though I wonder if it would be good to have those
invalid NAT rules in the test, to check for this cornercase.

Martin.

> Dumitru
> 

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to